CRICKET.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XII, Issue 721, 31 December 1903, Page 13

CRICKET.

AUCKLAND V. WELLINGTON. The interprovincial match between Wellington and Auckland has given further pointed proof, if proof was needed, that our cricket in fjhe Northern City is of very poor quality indeed. It has often been a complaint on the part of the local Association that people will not go to witness the various matches. The fact is not remarkable when they are treated to such exhibitions as was the case in the recent match. Anything more tedious to watch than the laboured efforts of the batsmen to make runs would indeed be hard to conceive. The Wellington eleven, although far from a really strong team, completely outclassed the local men, who at no time appeared to hold a winning position. Winning the toss the visitors batted first and put together 224, showing by far the best batting of the match. Auckland’s response on a batsmen’s wicket was 146. Going ‘in again, Wellington were sent to the right about’ for 113, Mills and Oliff bowling very well. Wanting 192 to win, the Auckland men found the task utterly beyond them, and after pottering about at the wicket in a halfhearted style, were all out for 101. Wellington thus winning by ’9O runs. That the better team won admits of no possible doubt whatever.

Canterbury’s victory over Ota£o was a fairly easy one, their first innings of 313 virtually winning them the match. The other three innings were remarkable for their even nature, the scores being Canterbury, 2nd innings, 157 ; Otago, 150 and 151. Canterbury thus won* by 169 runs.

Writing of the receipt 'great Test Match, “Not-Out” in the “Referee” says* . —lt is thought by many that the luck of the game went with England. But that is not my view. It was not luck which disposed of Victor Trumper, R. A. Duff, and Clem Hill in quick succession on the first day. The credit of it belongs to England’s bowlers and fieldsmen. It wal a fitting reward for high-class skill and headwork on the part of the visitors. A grander bit of fielding than Foster’s catching of Trumper could not be imagined, though Braund’s effort in the New South Wales match in disposing of Trumper in the second innings was equally great. It was a fitting effort to send back a batsman of Tiumper’s quality. There was some luck, no doubt, but on the whole it was almost equal, though one inclines to the view that it slightly favoured Australia. But there never was a match played in which the luck of weather and wicket did not play one part, great or small. It may be true that things in the field went the way of England, but if you look below the surface you will probably conclude that, after all, there is not much in that view. The “Daily News” tells us that “the Australians were always overplayed.” The “Sporting Life” considers that “England’s bowling was a great deal the strongest.” Views of that sort, written by men who did not see the match, are not to be too seriously considered. While there is some degree of truth in both criticisms, they are overdrawn. England’s batting was more solid ; Australia’s batting more brilliant and versatile. England’s bowling was more varied in character, and a little better in quality. Australia’s ground fielding was better, but that which won the match’ for England was • superiority in neither batting nor bowling, but superiority in taking chances offered by the batsmen. Possibly those who contend that England had the best of the luck have in mind the fact of Foster and Hi(st having been missed. But it need hardly be said that the misr sing of catches is, as a rule, faulty cricket. England’s catching was magnificent, Australia’s very fair. 'Had no rain fallen during the course of the game England would probably have gone down, for the reason that the wicket, faster and dryer than a Sydney wicket usually is at the start, must have worn badly for the fourth innings. As the wicket stood, it was a perforance of high merit for England to make the required runs for the loss of five wickets. The success of the Englishmen must be immensely gratifying to thousands in the Old Country, and especiallv to the committee of the MaXylebone C.C. and to those critics of the Press who saw some cricketing talent and some possibilities in the team. It has made the members of the team very happy.

The interprovincial cricket match, Nelson v. Marlborough, was won by Nelson by an innings and 97 runs. The highest scorers for the home team were .—Price, 61; Griffin, (not out), 53. For the visitors Neale scored 47 and 26, Hastilow (not out) 17 and 11. Marlborough made 102 and so, and Nelson’s one innings realised 279.

The fourth and fifth Test matches are arranged to take place on successive Saturdays at Sydney and Melbourne respectively. It is desirable that this arrangement should be altered if possible as if the weather be fine throughout for the fourth match to take place in Sydney, the players may finish one match only to immediately begin the next after travelling 400 miles by rail.